Using ROI Methodology to Measures the Benefits of King County GIS

Transcription

1 Using ROI Methodology to Measures the Benefits of King County GIS 2012 Washington GIS Conference Tacoma, Washington May 9, 2012 Greg Babinski, MA, GISP Finance & Marketing Manager King County GIS Center Seattle, WA URISA President Summit Chief Editor

2 Agenda Introduction & background to the GIS ROI Study GIS ROI Documentation Studies Oregon/King County GIS ROI Study A Curious Question about the Study Preliminary Results Next Steps Discussion

3 ROI Estimates & Benefit-Cost Analysis

4 ROI Estimates & Benefit-Cost Analysis Common tool for analyzing & configuring development plans Typically result in an estimate or forecast of business benefits

5 King County, Washington Microsoft Boeing Paccar Nordstrom's Amazon Starbucks Port of Seattle Population (1,931,000 (14th most populous US county) Area: 2130 square miles (sea level to 8,000 ) 39 incorporated cities Viable agricultural and private forestry areas Remote wilderness & watershed lands Weyerhaeuser Univ. of Washington Google Skype

6 King County GIS - Development History: Originated with 1992 PlanGraphics study 1992 Benefit Cost Analysis PlanGraphics identified 126 business applications and a $22 million capital cost estimate King County Seattle Metro merger 1993 joint King County Metro GIS scoping plan reduced $6.8 million scope approved by King County Council GIS capital project executed 1997 KCGIS O&M begins 2002 KCGIS Consolidation implemented

7 King County GIS 1992 GIS ROI Estimate

8 King County GIS 1992 GIS ROI Estimate

9 King County GIS 1992 GIS ROI Estimate

10 King County GIS 1992 GIS ROI Estimate

11 King County GIS - Development History: Originated with 1992 PlanGraphics study 1992 Benefit Cost Analysis PlanGraphics identified 126 business applications and a $22 million capital cost estimate King County Seattle Metro merger 1993 joint King County Metro GIS scoping plan reduced $6.8 million scope approved by King County Council GIS capital project executed 1997 KCGIS O&M begins 2002 KCGIS Consolidation implemented

12 2004 KCGIS Issue 4 Report: Reduced budget delivered reduced scope Only 15% of 126 applications completed via capital project Significant data deficiencies recognized

13 KCGIS Development: 500+/- desktop GIS users 100,000 annual internal web based GIS user sessions 2.2 million annual external web based GIS user sessions 50 GIS professionals GIS use expanded from 12 to 35 county departments and offices

14 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? Why are they not required? Why are they not performed?

15 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? Baltimore County, MD

16 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? Baltimore County, MD

17 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? State of Oregon

18 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? State of Oregon

19 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? New Zealand

20 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? New Zealand

21 GIS ROI Documentation Studies? New Zealand

22 Oregon/KCGIS GIS ROI Study Project Conceived during 2009 URISA AC in Anaheim Approach finalized during 2009 ULA in Seattle State of Oregon & King County joint funding KCGIS 2010 Priority Initiative Managed by KCGIS Center Jack Dangermond s Question about the Study

23 KCGIS GIS ROI Study May 2010 RFP sent to targeted consultants June 2010 consultant selection August 2010 contract signed July 2010 work began September & October 2011 Preliminary Results Released March 2012 Final Report Published

24 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs: Prof. Richard W. Zerbe Danielle Fumia & Travis Reynolds Pradeep Singh & Tyler Scott

25 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs: Benefit-Cost Analysis Center

26 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs: Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis

27 Scope of Work: KCGIS GIS ROI Study Literature Review Qualitative Interviews (n = 30) Quantitative Survey (n = 200) Final ROI Report Revised Interview/Survey Instruments for future studies

28 Methodology: KCGIS GIS ROI Study With versus without research design. What would have happened if KCGIS applications had not been implemented and how is King County better off having them? Literature review and qualitative interviews will identify key benefits associated with GIS applications (e.g., increased productivity). Questionnaire will allow assessment of the extent to which these benefits have been realized across different groups of users of GIS applications, as opposed to what these users would have done in the absence of GIS applications. By comparing the with and without scenarios, we can assess and monetize the added value of the GIS applications to compare to the costs of implementation, maintenance, and/or additional training.

29 KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Methodology With or without survey methodology: How has GIS altered agency output levels? Benefits associated with FTE reductions to produce the same (pre-gis) level of output Benefits associated with enhanced production with the same FTE levels Three stage analysis: Interview agency heads and key employees to assess the types of applications and business uses. Interviews were used to build an employee survey. Employees and managers across King County responded to the survey to record their pre and current (or with vs. without) GIS productivity by output types. Interview and survey results were compiled by output type, agency, and productivity levels. Results were then monetized. Monetized benefits compared to detailed GIS capital O&M, and end-user costs

30 KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Methodology 30 Detailed Interviews Completed 175 Survey Responses (some partial responses)

31 KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Methodology PERTINENT SURVEY QUESTIONS Please estimate the number of each output you currently produce (in 2010), being clear about the time frame (per day, per year, etc.). Also state the total number of outputs from your agency (if known), and the number of employees and full-time employees (FTEs) currently working on producing this output. If you answered that you did not produce a given output in the previous section, you may skip the personal production questions. How many units of this output do you personally produce? Choose # of units: How many units of this output do you personally produce Per Unit of Time: What percent of your time do you spend producing each output now? (%) What percent of your time do you spend producing each output now: Per Unit of Time: Number of Employees in your workgroup (including you) currently producing this output: Total FTEs in your workgroup (including you) currently producing this output:

32 KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Methodology PERTINENT SURVEY QUESTIONS Again, the outputs commonly produced by your agency are listed below in the first column. If you were not present when the output was produced without GIS, please answer No to the first question but provide your best estimate for the remaining questions. For each output, please indicate how having GIS has impacted labor productivity for you personally and for your agency overall. Did you personally produce this output without GIS? How many units of this output did you personally produce prior to GIS? Choose # of units: How many units of this output did you personally produce Per Unit of Time prior to GIS:?What percent of your time did you spend producing each output prior to GIS? What percent of your time did you spend producing each output Prior to GIS: Per Unit of Time: Number of Employees in your workgroup (including you) producing this output prior to GIS? Total FTEs in your workgroup (including you) producing this output prior to GIS?

33 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Results

34 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Results The most conservative estimate presented finds that the use of GIS has produced approximately $775 million in net benefits over the eighteen year period from 1992 to Thus a reasonable estimate of total gains is between $180 million and $87 million in 2010.

35 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Results Results by Departments: DNRP (except WTD): Wastewater Treatment: Department of Transportation: Department of Assessments: Other Departments: $87.44 million $54.45 million $18.78 million (-)$2.7 million $2.02 million Based on no increase in demand curve

36 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Results Theoretical basis for cost and benefit calculations

37 KCGIS GIS ROI Study Results

38 KCGIS GIS ROI Study By-Products King County Enterprise GIS Historical Development and Operational Costs Year Capital Costs (based on allocation table below) GIS PM Office Costs KCGIS Center (TRC) Agency GIS Unit O&M Costs Costs Agency GIS End-User Staff Costs Annual Total Costs 1991 $ 100,000 $ 104,000 $ 6,000 $ 210, $ 100,000 $ 104,000 $ 6,000 $ 210, $ 729,667 $ 104,000 $ 6,000 $ 839, $ 2,173,667 $ 416,000 $ 400,000 $ 2,989, $ 3,756,667 $ 416,000 $ 500,000 $ 4,672, $ 2,512,000 $ 1,373,000 $ 600,000 $ 4,485, $ 528,000 $ 1,760,000 $ 8,204,352 $ 703,300 $ 11,195, $ 98,500 $ 1,477,000 $ 8,204,352 $ 2,003,300 $ 11,783, $ 207,833 $ 1,099,000 $ 8,204,352 $ 2,919,800 $ 12,430, $ 182,833 $ 1,134,000 $ 8,362,432 $ 2,926,300 $ 12,605, $ 182,833 $ 1,077,000 $ 8,362,432 $ 2,926,300 $ 12,548, $ 2,430,000 $ 5,675,072 $ 3,153,150 $ 11,258, $ 2,777,000 $ 4,483,149 $ 4,961,720 $ 12,221, $ 3,082,000 $ 4,479,987 $ 7,323,206 $ 14,885, $ 3,148,000 $ 4,641,229 $ 6,865,133 $ 14,654, $ 3,470,000 $ 4,584,320 $ 6,702,160 $ 14,756, $ 4,058,000 $ 3,944,096 $ 6,869,797 $ 14,871, $ 4,107,000 $ 4,339,296 $ 6,892,954 $ 15,339, $ 3,884,000 $ 4,315,584 $ 6,578,260 $ 14,777, $ 4,269,000 $ 3,975,712 $ 6,396,945 $ 14,641, $ 4,400,000 $ 3,517,280 $ 5,921,860 $ 13,839,140 Total: $ 10,572,000 $ 1,144,000 $ 43,545,000 $ 86,793,645 $ 73,162,185 $ 215,216,830

39 KCGIS GIS ROI Study By-Products Agency GIS Staff for Agency Budget and GIS User Calculations GIS Managers & Leads Professional GIS Staff GIS Super Users GIS Desktop Users GIS Web Application User Sessions , , , , , , , , ,000

40 KCGIS GIS ROI Study By-Products KCGIS (TRC) Center Staffing Levels Managers GIS FTEs Admin Staff GIS TLTs or KC Temps Contract GIS Staff Total GIS Staff

41 Future Steps: King County Press Release Article in ICMA ESRI Press Book of GIS for Elected Officials Presentations at GIS in Action, Washington GIS & ESRI User Conferences Likely articles in GFR, URISA Journal Jack stops the presses ArcNews Summer issue article on page 1 Analyze detailed department results Analyze detailed benefits by output type Analyze detailed benefits by productivity type Tell our bosses - great interest within KC government Compare with Twin Cities/Metro GIS Parcel Data ROI study Compliment & Inform Multnomah County ROI study URISA ROI Workshop development Refine methodology KCGIS GIS ROI Study Encourage/support more studies

42 Questions & Answers: At what stage is KCGIS in the total potential business use of GIS? Are the KCGIS results good? How do we know? KCGIS GIS ROI Study Do we need similar studies of other large counties? What about a single latitudinal study of 10 mid-sized cities in Washington & Oregon?

43 Acknowledgement: State of Oregon GIS and Cy Smith KCGIS Technical Committee Richard O. Zerbe & UW GIS ROI Study Team KCGIS Center Interview team: George Horning, Manager Greg Stought, Enterprise Services Manager Dennis Higgins, GISP, Client Services Manager Debbie Bull, GIS DBA Greg Babinski, GISP, Finance & Marketing Manager Questions, Comments & Discussion

44 Greg Babinski, MA, GISP URISA President-Elect SUMMIT Chief Editor Finance & Marketing Manager King County GIS Center 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 706 Seattle, WA